X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org
To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
From: mwoehlke <mwoehlke AT tibco DOT com>
Subject:  Re: bash-3.1-7 bug
Date:  Thu, 14 Sep 2006 10:20:04 -0500
Lines: 55
Message-ID: <eebrv4$jho$1@sea.gmane.org>
References:  <091320060438 DOT 11140 DOT 45078B490008FD8600002B8422007610640A050E040D0C079D0A AT comcast DOT net> <20060913052510 DOT GB1256 AT trixie DOT casa DOT cgf DOT cx> <loom DOT 20060913T160909-692 AT post DOT gmane DOT org> <ee9oa9$sj$1 AT sea DOT gmane DOT org> <ee9q53$74g$1 AT sea DOT gmane DOT org> <loom DOT 20060913T234039-426 AT post DOT gmane DOT org> <ee9vg0$qeb$1 AT sea DOT gmane DOT org> <45089854 DOT 8010705 AT scytek DOT de> <20060914001902 DOT GB24899 AT trixie DOT casa DOT cgf DOT cx> <4508ABAF DOT 5090408 AT scytek DOT de> <20060914020737 DOT GC24899 AT trixie DOT casa DOT cgf DOT cx>
Mime-Version:  1.0
Content-Type:  text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding:  7bit
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:1.8.0.5) Gecko/20060719 Thunderbird/1.5.0.5 Mnenhy/0.7.4.0
In-Reply-To: <20060914020737.GC24899@trixie.casa.cgf.cx>
X-IsSubscribed: yes
Mailing-List: contact cygwin-help AT cygwin DOT com; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:cygwin-unsubscribe-archive-cygwin=delorie DOT com AT cygwin DOT com>
List-Subscribe: <mailto:cygwin-subscribe AT cygwin DOT com>
List-Archive: <http://sourceware.org/ml/cygwin/>
List-Post: <mailto:cygwin AT cygwin DOT com>
List-Help: <mailto:cygwin-help AT cygwin DOT com>, <http://sourceware.org/ml/#faqs>
Sender: cygwin-owner AT cygwin DOT com
Mail-Followup-To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
Delivered-To: mailing list cygwin AT cygwin DOT com

Christopher Faylor wrote:
> On Wed, Sep 13, 2006 at 06:09:03PM -0700, Volker Quetschke wrote:
>> Christopher Faylor wrote:
>>> On Wed, Sep 13, 2006 at 04:46:28PM -0700, Volker Quetschke wrote:
>> (snip)
>>> Do I have to make the observation again that whether this is the case
>>> or not, it is not a primary goal of the Cygwin project to support these
>>> people?
>> Yes.  Did it ever cross your mind that the whole "Linux on Windows"
>> thing is pretty useless if it cannot be used in the "real world".
> 
> Death of Cygwin predicted?  Everybody panic and/or sip?

...As much as I agree with Volker's assertion (one user using Cygwin as 
a unix-like front-end for cl.exe, right here - although you'll recall 
that I'm also one of the ones that understands what Cygwin wants to be 
and never got tripped up by make (though in all honesty I haven't 
upgraded yet ;-) but only because I really don't like messing with a 
working build machine, and if 3.81 broke it would certainly be *my* 
fault))...

>> I mean, if people want to have a plain vanilla Linux thingy they can
>> just install it.  Grab a Redhat, Suse or Debian DVD and everything
>> works fine.
> 
> I suspect that the "Well, they can just install Linux (floppies, CDs,
> DVDs) if they feel like it" observation has been made several times a
> year for the last ten years.  It's obviously not a very powerful
> argument since Cygwin is still here and you can't really assert that the
> only reason it is here is because make understood MS-DOS paths or bash
> dealt properly with \r\n line endings.
> 
> I doubt that Eric will want to deal with the fallout of having bash not
> understand \r\n line endings but, if he does, it would be his decision
> and, again, I would support it 100%.  I am very eager to see things like
> configure scripts work faster and if we have to drop a few scared or
> lazy people along the way to accomplish that goal, that's fine with me.
> I have no problem at all with being a part of a smaller community which
> doesn't need to use notepad to edit their bash scripts.

...I have to agree that this is a different case. Changing makefiles 
that used DOS paths is one thing; you can make them work (like I do, by 
doing things 'right' in the first place), but if you've built a system 
on makefiles relying on DOS paths, fixing them can be painful and error 
prone. Whereas 'dos2unix <script>' is easy and reliable. So anyone that 
can't bring themselves to type that little line would definitely qualify 
as 'lazy' in my book. :-) Especially when Eric's other suggestion (add 
'\r' to IFS) is also available.

And just in case anyone *can't* live with Eric's latest patch, I still 
recommend finding out what Rodney is doing in the Interix version of bash.

-- 
Matthew
We apologize for the inconvenience.


--
Unsubscribe info:      http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple
Problem reports:       http://cygwin.com/problems.html
Documentation:         http://cygwin.com/docs.html
FAQ:                   http://cygwin.com/faq/